The next two significant poskim who addressed this issue were Rav Avraham Yitzchak haKohen Kook (1934 שו”ת אורח משפט אורח חיים סימן מח) z”l, and Rav Chaim Elazar Shapira (1930’s שו”ת מנחת אלעזר חלק ב סימן עב) z”l. These two great Rabbis had a huge influence on the Jewish community of the early 1900’s. 

Rav Kook, trained in Volozhin and served the Lithuanian Jewish community until 1904 when he moved to Yaffo in Ottoman Palestine. He would eventually establish Yeshivat Mercaz ha-Rav and serve as the first Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Palestine beginning in 1921. Rav Kook passed away in 1935. Rav Chaim Elazar Shapira, a scion of the Spira family, served as the Rebbe in Munkatch from 1903 until his passing in 1937. Together, Rav Kook and the Munkatcher Rebbe wrote on every area of Jewish life, Jewish law and Jewish thought.

Both Rav Kook and Rav Shapira distinguished between Shofar and every other Mitzvah based on speech. They were both concerned that the telephone introduced enough of an outside component into the sound that one could not fulfill the Mitzvah of Shofar, but they saw no reason to limit the ability to answer Amen to any other berachot. 

Rav Kook wrote: 

בשומע על ידי טעליפאן או ראדיא קדושה או ברכו, אם מותר לענות אחריו? הנה אנחנו קיי”ל שמאחר שהצבור במקומו יש שם עשרה במקום אחד אין שום מחיצה מפסיקה בין ישראל לאביהם שבשמים. ויכולים לענות אפילו אלה ששומעים מרחוק, כמבואר בשו”ע או”ח סי’ נ”ה ס”כ. 

ואם נבוא להסתפק שמא זה נקרא קול הברה ולא עצם הקול? אין לנו חלוק זה כי אם דוקא בשופר, ששם הקפידה תורה על הקול שיהי’ קול שופר. ועוד כמה דרכי קפידא, שלא יהיה שינוי בקול, כמו שלא יהיה מצופה בדבר אחר וכיו”ב. כמבואר באו”ח סי’ תקפ”ו ותקפ”ז. משא”כ בעניני תפילה. דכל שהוא שומע הענין אין קפידא ויכול לענות. 

Are you permitted to answer [Amen] to kedusha or barchu that you heard on a telephone or  radio? Behold, we maintain that once there is a minyan of ten in one place that, “Even an iron wall can not come between the Jewish People and our Father in Heaven” (Pesachim 85b) and therefore, even those who hear from a distance are permitted to answer [Amen]. As it says in the Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayyim 55:20.

And if you bring a doubt that perhaps this [the telephone] should be called “the echo of a voice” and not the voice itself? This distinction applies only to the Shofar because there the Torah was especially careful that the sound should be the sound of the Shofar. In addition, there are more specific rules about the Shofar, like: there can be no change in the sound, the Shofar can not be covered, etc. As it says in the Shulchan Aruch 586, 587. And this does not apply to Tefila. As long as you can hear the matter, you can answer Amen.

Rav Shapira wrote:

והך דאמרי’ בפסחים פ”ה ע”ב שאפי’ מחיצה ברזל אינה מפסקת פירש”י שאין הפסק לפני המקום שהכל גלוי וידוע לפניו ואין סתימה לפניו עכל”ה. ומזה אפי’ בריחוק הרבה פרסאות אם שומע קול חבירו ע”י הטעלעפאן מברך י”ל שיוכל לענות אמן או קדושה וברכו…

אמנם לענין שופר שנשאלתי אם יוצאין בשמיעתו ע”י הטעלעפאן. זה פשוט לע”ד דלא יצא. דלא עדיף מהתוקע לתוך הבור או לתוך הדות לאותן העומדים בחוץ אם קול שופר שמעו בלי קול הברה כלל יצאו ואם קול הברה שמעו עם קול שופר לא יצאו כמו שפירש”י בר”ה דף כ”ח ע”א ובש”ע סי’ תקפ”ז וה”נ בא הקול ע”י הטעלעפאן מעורב לא כמו קול האיש שמדבר רק קולו כאוב וגם קול שופר ישתנה בודאי ויתערב כמו דרך הברת הטעלעפאן וז”פ.

And that which was said in Pesachim 85b that, “Even an iron wall can not come between the Jewish People and our Father in Heaven” was explained by Rashi, “There is no hefsek before the Omnipresent One, for all is know to before God and nothing is close before Him.” And from this [we learn], that if you heard your friends voice making a beracha on the telephone, even at a great distance, that you can answer Amen and to kedusha and barchu.

However, regarding that which you asked me about whether you can fulfill the Mitzva of Shofar over the phone? It is clear, in my humble opinion, that you can not. For this is no better than blasting the Shofar into a ditch or a barrel for those who are standing outside [the ditch] – if they heard the voice of the Shofar without the voice of any havara at all then they have fulfilled their obligation, but if they heard the sound of havara together with the sound of the Shofar, they have not fulfilled their obligation. And so too in regards to the telephone, the sound comes mixed and does not feel like a person speaking, rather their voice is like an ov. And the sound of the Shofar will certainly be changed and be mingled with havara live the havara of the telephone.

The distinction that these two גדולים make between Shofar and all other Mitzvot based on speech also show up in the work of Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank¹ and many other major poskim.

The language that the מנחת אלעזר uses to describe the sound of the voice on the phone is important as well. His experience of the phone was that it was like hearing the voice of a ghost. While there may be times when the phone gets an echo, the disembodied voice does not reflect our reality today. The technology has moved forward enough that it simply sounds like the person on the other end of the line. Does that mean that he would change his decision for Shofar? I am not certain. But we will say one of his students make that leap.

 

1. See מקראי קודש לחנוכה ופורים סימן יא as well as שו”ת מנחת יצחק חלק ב סימן קיג where Rav Herzog quotes Rav Frank